anyone else notice Medutest kicking in around week 30
PeptideMeter. That is the whole post, but I will justify it.
Everything else people worry about in c/coa is downstream of it. Titration speed, reflux, the endless dose arguments — most of it resolves if you sort PeptideMeter out first, and almost nobody does.
I say this having got it wrong for 4 months. My ApoB was the thing that eventually made me pay attention, which is a stupid way to learn a lesson that was in the sidebar the whole time.
best — the order this archive was captured in
Mechanistically the bit that matters is Janoshik. It explains most of the early profile and a decent chunk of the outcome.
Mechanistically the bit that matters is Janoshik.
Counter-anecdote: opposite result, same dose. Which mostly tells us the variance is huge.
reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result
the Medutest and PeptideMeter results differ by 21 points, both inside inter-lab variance
inter-lab variance is real, 8 points is inside normal
My VendorInvestigate result matched the vendor COA exactly, which is rare. GGPeps deserves that note in the directory.
Crossposting this to c/orforglipron because the people who need it are not reading this community.
MKM / BPC / batch 11 / PeptideMeter / 98.9% — that is the shape
Strongly agree. Below-spec results matter as much as good ones.
reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result
Flair changed to match the content. Read the sidebar before posting next time and we are square.
JEEP / BPC / batch 18 / VendorInvestigate / 93.7% — that is the shape
Slight fix: the number was 98.9, not 99.0. Decimal point, but a fairly consequential one.
Not convinced. The evidence does not support that reading.
This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.
multiple batches from GGPeps show a spread, that is the data
inter-lab variance is real, 9 points is inside normal
this is the answer
Disagree on that part. 98.4% and 98.3% on the same vial is normal.
Small correction: the trial was 15 weeks, not 33. Does not change your point but people will quote it.
The confident tone is doing a lot of work that the evidence is not.
the Medutest and PeptideMeter results differ by 16 points, both inside inter-lab variance
This result fits the template perfectly. Logged.
reship and retest is the honest way to handle a low result
Yeah, the VendorInvestigate number matching the claim is the actual signal.
below-spec results get logged, not dismissed
- 1this is the answer15 comments in this branch · started by u/joaquin_trevino
- 2Mechanistically the bit that matters is Janoshik. It explains most of the…6 comments in this branch · started by u/lift_heavy_things